Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    October 11, 2012 3:00pm-3:30pm PDT

3:00 pm
>> thank you commissioners, appreciate your time today. >> that will conclude item 5, on the successor agency. commissioners you are now at your 15-min. general public category. this is a time where members of the public may address you on items of interest to the public that fall in your area. agenda item may not be addressed. december the public and address you for up to 2-3 minutes each. keep in mind that there is a time limit.
3:01 pm
>> i read an interesting thing in the paper. we have 37% of the citizens of foreign-born; it is nice to see reflection on this board, so when people come to san francisco from some of the places. we see that this weekend, sailing races, baseball games, disney cruise ships, bigger skyscrapers, million dollar jets that we heard flying atop of us. the zoning ap, market street, i hope you guys put a little fitness app in there, like we
3:02 pm
have on the marina. i would like to call attention to a place where the light is not shine, three blocks away from union square; one block away from where oracle is hosting -- this we can then have hired security guards and police officers to wash their block. at the place where it is okay to smoke and trade crack, it has crippled our city, society and humaniy. alike to i would like to invite you to read with us at
3:03 pm
4070 farrell. thank you for your work. additional public comment? >> david -- i do not fill out a speaker card. i want to recognize brian smith and his good work for the department. he left last thursday due to family employment situation. he was the it manager for city planning. he did a great job responding to public requests, managing operations and doing a lot of the things that made your work possible in the work of the other planners. i want to thank him publicly for his good work and i look forward to filling that position with someone hopefully nearly as capable as that is even possible. thank you.
3:04 pm
>> any additional general public comment? seeing then we will onto the next item. >> commissioners you are now at public comment on agenda items where the public hearing has been closed. at this time members of the public may address you on item 6 on your calendar; it has been heard in the public hearing, the public was allowed to testify, and the hearing was closed. before you take your final action, the public is allowed to speak once again on this item. i do not have speakers. >> calling for any general public comments on item 6? the public hearing portion is closed.
3:05 pm
>> you are now in the category of consideration of finding senior final action. the public hearing for this category is closed. it is case 2012.0206c, for 2299 market st., request for use authorization; on september 20 the commission passed the motion of intent to approve this project with conditions, vote was 7-0. i believe staff was [indiscernible].
3:06 pm
mr. smith, your item is up. >> indefinite commissioners. michael smith. planning department staff. on september 20th, you voted by a vote of 7-0 to approve the project for 2299 market, request for u size limit, exceed 2900 sq. limit for upper market; the motion has been revised to reflect your sentiments and i am available for any questions or comments that you may have. >> thank you. is there any general public comment? commissioner antonini. >> move to approve with the conditions. >> second.
3:07 pm
>> the motion is for approval. >> one second. commissioner -- >> didn't we have a long discussion of the temporary certificate of occupancy related to something? i don't remember what it was. >> it had to do with a date on when the clock should start. the project sponsor suggest another time. people don't get final certificate of occupancy; i suggested a temporary certificate of occupancy. whoever made the motion incorporated that into it. >> is that in here?
3:08 pm
>> it was not included as a specific condition of approval. if you like to do that i can do that. >> yes. >> the maker of a motion is amending the motion to make sure that the approval is based on the temporary certificate of occupancy. >> five-year clock. >> i thought that was our understanding, temporary as opposed to final certificate. >> i can't find the language to the five-year. >> [indiscernible] not to seek your retail tenant for a period of five years. it was a side agreement, already agreed to. >> i thought you wanted to have it in our actual motion. can we add that in right now? >> it has been amended.
3:09 pm
>> without amendment, i am assuming that the maker and second are in agreement wit the amendment. (voting) thank you commissioners, the motion passes anonymously. >> i will give you a brief update. sarah dunn still not feeling well. if you like we can we schedule another hearing
3:10 pm
when sarah is back in the office just in the point person on this . and working close with the community. in 2009 you adopted a master plan for the -- development, appeared in concert with the redevelopment agency at that time. under the loss of redevelopment this year the side was not mentioned as one that could move forward under tax increment because there was no contractual obligation that made the site possible to move forward under redevelopment. this is one of those plans weather was brought consensus; the community was very supportive. we all feel the pain of not being able to move forward as plan in the previous version. the good news is that we are working with the office of economic and workforce development. we are re initiating
3:11 pm
work on the community to see what we can do with the tools in place, and with the current development climate. to that and we were having a first public workshop which will take place next saturday the thirteenth at 10 a.m. at the visitation valley library. sarah has been working closely with the community and with the developer, there is a workshop for the public and the commission. with that, again i'm happy to take questions. i know there are some members of the public in the audience who have been working on this as well, and we are happy to schedule another hearing from sarah can be here to get into more digital with you. >> i will open it up to public comment.
3:12 pm
>> thank you commissioners. jonathan -- general manager of upc, we are the project sponsor for the visitation valley -- library area; we are here to support the work that planning is doing with the mayor's office to bring this critical project forward in a post-redevelopment climate. we are looking forward to working with you at such a time that some plan revisions may come forward. the first step i believe will be going and checking in with the community on the thirteenth about what some of the key priorities are, that the community has that will inform the processes we proceed. as we said before, there are a dozen years
3:13 pm
of community driven planning on this project. our company has been every step of the way and we are not going anywhere, anytime soon. we are about 90 percent to the remediation of that site and are looking forward to working with the city in a phased implementation on alternative sources of financing that can help with infrastructure and particularly some of the great improvements to that area that we hope to implent. thank you. >> any additional public comment? commissioner -- >> i would like to express my support for sarah coming and present it to us maybe even after the thirteenth, brought back to this commission. we have followed this project
3:14 pm
with a lot of collective and personal interest. it would be greatly get an update. for my own benefit, the library is the corner building at the -- site, historic building which anchors the original complex? >> the new library. i don't have the address off the top of my head. 201 leland. >> on leland, okay, thanks. >> commissioner wu. >> thank you. i would like to echo commissioner morris sentiments about bringing back the hearing; perhaps you in the department can engage the chinese press. i want to make sure we engage a broad group of people to be participants. >> commissioner antonini. >> when sarah is available i too would like to hear
3:15 pm
any updates that you may have in the future. >> commissioner -- >> maybe i think it is appropriate if you had a little sidebar that presentation regarding the development going on just south of there in brisbane. universal paragon is the developer. >> yes. >> maybe we could have a little short sidebar on that, and the connection between -- site and brisbane. john -- that would be really great. >> yes. >> commissioner moore. >> it would be helpful to get an update on the
3:16 pm
transportation improvements in the area>> because connection to a potential station in that area would be part of the discussion, talking about high speeds, modified electrification of the line. how does the plan reflect this possibility? >> as far as the date, october 18th, or nov. 1st. (off mic) >> you would or would not? >> i would recommend later. >> november 1st. >> thank you all. >> commissioners now you are on item number 8, an informational
3:17 pm
hearing on sustainable community strategy and the regional housing needs allocation. >> good afternoon commissioners -- planning staff, joined by -- mayor's office of housing, and the transportation authority. three original planning efforts. sustainable community strategy, regional housing needs assessment, and regional transportation plan. it begins with senate bill 375, adopted in oct 2008, calling of each of california's aging ridges to develop an integrated transportation, land-use and housing plan known as a sustainable community strategy or scs. it must demonstrate how each region will reduce green gas emission; it requires that the regional housing needs
3:18 pm
allocation which anticipates housing needs for local jurisdictions also must be consistent with the scs. the past three years the association of bay area governments -- working together with the regions first sustainable community strategy, plan bay area. update regional and transportation plans, and housing needs assessment. it work closely with the plan stakeholders including the bay area's nine counties, 101 cities that have authority over their jurisdiction. as well as other stakeholders. local participation is letting each county, which in san francisco is a transportation county authority, mta and the mayor's office of housing. the agency collaborated closely
3:19 pm
with this process including regional roundtables, co-authoring a series of memos and generally coordinating the regional engagement. so far plan bay area has resulted in the adoption of three plant components, expectation investment strategy, and planned his area of adopted may of this year and consultation plan in july. preferred land-use scenario; the scenario is on the projection the between 2010-and 2040 the area will grow- fulfilling this will require the commitment of local
3:20 pm
jurisdictions that maintain control over the zoning; second changes to state and federal policy, and third participation of private and nonprofit sectors to help direct and say group appropriately. >> so for san francisco anticipating growth through 2040 about 191,000 jobs and 92,000 housing units, 34 percent increase in the
3:21 pm
number of jobs and 29 percent increase in the number of units. san francisco growth similar in the terms of percentage. we are doing our fair share, also significant shiftour growth is in stagnant compared to the regions growth over time; this thing which looks like godzilla is a map of the priority development area in san francisco. the colors are not that meaningful from the san francisco standpoint, the red is downtown; balboa park, it shows all of the areas prior to the development area where we
3:22 pm
should focus a growth. fit overlaps almost 100 percent the areas where we have done planning over the last 10 years the city works closely with the staff to make sure that the growth projections are basically what we have been working on on all of our planning efforts. the strategy confirms the planning we have been doing over the last decade, ensuring that we are doing our part of on the region. looking at policy city to be strengthened. including an update to the transportation element and other elements of the general plant. we also know there are more planning than is to be done. in terms of the region housing needs assessment,or allocations, the processes correlated with the housing element. every city receives from the region and amount of housing
3:23 pm
that is supposed to produce over the next eight years for people of all income levels. the housing element is the way we proved to the state that we have the zoning to accommodate the growth. the arena processes gone for years but this is the first time that he did it to correlate with a larger land-use strategy. the rena about the lease was updated a direct 70 percent on your location to the regions primary development area and that is how we will slowdowns and in the sprawl in the region. if you go to the overhead here,
3:24 pm
the allocation for the next rena cycle, jan. 2014 through oct, 2022, an average of 3266 housing units per year. this is less than the current allocation of 4159 units per year; we feel that the allocation is more realistically align with our ability to deliver units in the market. we recognize that this is still ambitious; we only had that annual level of production twice in the last they coulddecade. we see that 21.6% of the people less than -- 16% is 00 18.9% moderate income,
3:25 pm
market rate, 43.4%. once again san francisco needs to provide nearly 60 percent of its housing for below market rate. for the regional housing needs allocation. a little bit less than last time but still a substantial share. one of the biggest challenges we have in the city because every single unit that we build has to be subsidized for affordable housing. we wonder where that is going to come from. affordable housing fund can help in that regard. i will turn it over to liz -- from the transportation authority. >> good morning commissioners. good afternoon, liz brison san francisco county transportation authority, steve asked me to recap
3:26 pm
highlights from the transportation investment strategy, approved this past may by mpc and abag. a little background on what the regional competition planning processes.something going on since sb 375 was passed, updated every four years about those regions long response petition activities they do revenue forecast.this update, 277 billion. and then they speak about how this funding should be prioritized. 91 billion is considered discretionary to the region. the rpp is quite important for two reasons. it is a sort of gatekeeperi to federal and state funds for transportation projects in san francisco might need to access. you have to be in the rtp in
3:27 pm
order to get a federal action on your project. it is also the regions policy statement about transportation. indicates where we are headed in this region. with adding context i want to recap maybe four of the highlights from the transportation investment strategy, moving towards adoption in the rtp next year. we have quite a bit to be proud of and happy about here in san francisco from the process. that is thanks to the extensive involvement of san francisco from the staff level, multiple agencies have been coordinating, myself, the planning department staff, mpa, mayor's office of housing -- we have had great leadership from the policymaker level. at mpc we have supervisors and brought more leadership to san
3:28 pm
francisco in the original planning process. and is also extensive and vomit from san francisco-based advocates and stakeholders. all of that has resulted in a lot of wins in this process. the first i wanted to mention this the investment strategy articulates what the region's future priorities will be for competitive federal funding programs, new starts and small starts. all the potential candidates, there were two projects identified by the region that should be the regions next priorities for new starts. one of those is a downtown extension of caltrans for the high-speed railroad project, quite a significant policy direction to get at the regional level. that project was not recommend it is fully funded during the lifecycle of the rtp. at the small start level more like bus type projects -- the
3:29 pm
-- project was recommended as one of three small start priorities for the region. the second highlight that i wanted to mention, the region took a performance-based approach to identifying which projects should be included in the regional transportation plan. there were over 100 that were evaluated and based on the evaluationsome shook out as being in the highest tier, can we get the overhead? this shows that out of all the 700 project

105 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on